Samsung Electronics Co. (005930) was sanctioned by a U.S. judge for violating a court order protecting the confidentiality of Apple Inc.’s patent-licensing agreements.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul Grewal in San Jose, California, yesterday ordered sanctions against Samsung’s law firm, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, that were less extensive than what Apple and Nokia Oyj had sought. The judge said his “public findings of wrongdoing” and Quinn Emanuel’s payment of Apple and Nokia’s legal costs would be enough.
The admonishment and reimbursement would be “sufficient both to remedy Apple and Nokia’s harm and to discourage similar conduct in the future,” the judge said.
A report sent via e-mail by Samsung’s law firm in the U.S. disclosed Apple’s patent license agreements with Nokia, including “highly confidential financial terms,” to employees of the Suwon, South Korea-based company who weren’t authorized to see the information, according to court filings.
The e-mail disclosure, which Samsung said was accidental, came as the companies were waging their first patent-infringement dispute in federal court in San Jose over technology in smartphones. Apple won a 2012 jury trial and was ultimately awarded damages of $930 million. Apple, based in Cupertino, California, has another case against Samsung going to trial in March over newer smartphone models, including Samsung’s Galaxy S III.
Adam Yates, a Samsung spokesman, didn’t immediately respond to an e-mail after regular business hours seeking a comment on the ruling.
The iPhone maker sought stiff penalties for what it characterized as carelessness by Samsung, saying the mishandling of confidential information had compromised Apple’s ability to negotiate licenses. Samsung’s lawyers at Quinn Emanuel countered that the alleged damage from the disclosures was overblown.
Apple’s lawyers described the breach of confidentiality as “massive,” saying the e-mail in question was “sent and resent or forwarded literally scores of times” to as many as 223 people, including 90 Samsung employees who weren’t authorized to see it, and 130 outside lawyers at 19 different law firms, some of which are litigating against Apple in different cases.
The first case is Apple Inc. (AAPL) v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., 11-cv-1846, and the second case is Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., 12-cv-630, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Jose).
To contact the reporter on this story: Joel Rosenblatt in San Francisco at jrosenblatt@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net
via apple - Google News http://ift.tt/1hPJUAz
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment